Thirukumar Vs the District Collector

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the order dated 16.05.2023 vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.7582-183/2022/A1 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Myilsamy For Respondents : Mr.P.Ganesan Additional Government Pleader

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings dated 16.05.2023 issued in Na.Ka.No.7582-183/2022/A1 by the second respondent.

¶27

Page 2 of 10

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.No.23378 of 2023

¶30

When the matter is taken up for hearing today, it is brought to the

¶31

notice of this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that similar issue was already considered by this Court in W.P.No.3181 of 2017 etc., and the relevant portion is extracted hereunder:-

¶32

“ 99. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court disposes of all the

¶33

writ petitions with the following directions :-

¶34

Answer to Issue - 1

¶35

The ayacutadars, who were in possession of lands within the ayacut zones, in which open wells were in existence, could very well draw water from the existing open wells situated on either side of the PAP canal and use the same for agricultural activity within the ayacut zone.

¶36

Answer to Issue - 2

¶37

The protected distance prescribed in G.O. Ms. No.2261 would be only with regard to sinking of new open wells and deepening of existing open wells and other than that, usage of water from the well already in existence is no where barred. Ayacutadars, who are in

¶38

Page 3 of 10

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

W.P.No.23378 of 2023 possession of lands as also open wells, which were sunk, prior to the formation of PAP canal could very well use the open wells for the purpose of drawal of water through motors of the horsepower prescribed under G.O. Ms. No.2261 for irrigating their lands during off-season and there could be no bar on the usage of the open wells already in existence prior to the formation of PAP canal.

¶41

Answer to Issue - 3

¶42

The prescription of motors of 5 HP and 10 HP prescribed in G.O. Ms. No.2261 dated 3.11.1967, more particularly spelt out at S. No.(v) of the said Government Order must scrupulously followed and any installation of motors beyond the said horse power is illegal and impermissible and has to be necessarily removed by the PAP authorities and electrical service connection given to such of those motors should be disconnected in accordance with law.

¶43

Answer to Issue - 4

¶44

In adherence to G.O. Ms. No.2261 dated 3.11.1967 the usage of water drawn, from open wells situated adjacent to the PAP canal in the ayacut zone by any person, be it the ayacutadars or non-ayacutadars could be only for utilisation of the water within the ayacut region and not outside the ayacut region.

¶45

Page 4 of 10

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

W.P.No.23378 of 2023

¶48

Answer to Issue - 5

¶49

The ayacutadars are not permitted to transport water through pipelines from the open wells within the ayacut zone without approval of the Water Management Committee and such transportation could be only within the ayacut zone and not beyond the ayacut zone. Further, the transportation of water from open wells situated adjacent to the PAP canal is not permitted and no approval could be granted by the Water Management Committee and the PAP authorities.

¶50

Answer to Issue - 6

¶51

Water from the PAP canal is earmarked only for agricultural purposes and not for any other purpose. Therefore, water from PAP canal cannot be used for industrial and commercial purposes and any supply of water from the PAP canal for industrial or commercial purposes is to be stopped forthwith.

¶52

Answer to Issue - 7

¶53

No borewell is permitted to be dug or permitted to be operated on either side of the PAP canal and also throughout the ayacut region and if any such borewell is in operation, the PAP authorities have to take necessary action to immediately seal the borewell and stop it from being used to draw water.

¶54

Page 5 of 10

¶55

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

W.P.No.23378 of 2023

¶57

Answer to Issue - 8

¶58

None of the land owners would be entitled to modify the sub-channels for taking water to their lands, which is outside the ayacut zone, thereby preventing flow of water to the tail-end farmers, within the ayacut zone, for the purpose of carrying out their agricultural operations.

¶59

Answer to Issue - 9

¶60

The lesser diameter of the pipeline used for the purpose of drawing water from the PAP canal or subchannel cannot be said to impermissible and the said contention deserves to be negatived.

¶61

Answer to Issue – 10

¶62

There arises no necessity to revisit the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No.2261 dated 3.11.1967, even after passage of more than five decades and the directions given in the Government Order needs to be followed scrupulously in letter and spirit.

¶63

Insofar as release of water is concerned, necessary steps shall be taken by the PAP authorities for release of water to the respective zones at the respective points of time, as stipulated in the Government Orders.

¶64

Insofar as the writ petitions relating to providing of electricity service connection, which have been disconnected/ordered to be disconnected by the Joint Action

¶65

Page 6 of 10

¶66

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶67

W.P.No.23378 of 2023 Committee pursuant to inquiry, the Joint Action Committee formed by the Government is directed to keep in abeyance the orders passed by it and to grant one more opportunity to the individual petitioners, whose electricity service connection had been disconnected, to enable them to place all the relevant materials before the Joint Action Committee and the Joint Action Committee, upon satisfaction of the materials and also after making a personalised spot inspection, in the presence of the respective petitioner, upon following the directions issued by this Court supra, is directed to pass appropriate speaking orders, with detailed reasons therein pointing out the infractions of the petitioner, if it decides to stick with the orders already passed with regard to disconnection of electricity and pass order and upon such order being passed, it is open to the petitioners, if aggrieved by the said orders, to work out their remedy in the manner known to law.”

¶68